linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] perf uprobe: Skip prologue if program compiled without optimization

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Thu, 18 Aug 2016 14:47:23 +0530
From:	"Naveen N. Rao" <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
To:	Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>,
	Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>
Cc:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, peterz@...radead.org,
	mingo@...hat.com, alexander.shishkin@...ux.intel.com,
	mhiramat@...nel.org, wangnan0@...wei.com,
	hemant@...ux.vnet.ibm.com, Michael Petlan <mpetlan@...hat.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v2 2/2] perf uprobe: Skip prologue if program compiled
 without optimization

On 2016/08/03 02:28PM, Ravi Bangoria wrote:
> Function prologue prepares stack and registers before executing function
> logic. When target program is compiled without optimization, function
> parameter information is only valid after prologue. When we probe entrypc
> of the function, and try to record function parameter, it contains
> garbage value.
> 
> For example,
>   $ vim test.c
>     #include <stdio.h>
> 
>     void foo(int i)
>     {
>        printf("i: %d\n", i);
>     }
> 
>     int main()
>     {
>       foo(42);
>       return 0;
>     }
> 
>   $ gcc -g test.c -o test
>   $ objdump -dl test | less
>     foo():
>     /home/ravi/test.c:4
>       400536:       55                      push   %rbp
>       400537:       48 89 e5                mov    %rsp,%rbp
>       40053a:       48 83 ec 10             sub    -bashx10,%rsp
>       40053e:       89 7d fc                mov    %edi,-0x4(%rbp)
>     /home/ravi/test.c:5
>       400541:       8b 45 fc                mov    -0x4(%rbp),%eax
>     ...
>     ...
>     main():
>     /home/ravi/test.c:9
>       400558:       55                      push   %rbp
>       400559:       48 89 e5                mov    %rsp,%rbp
>     /home/ravi/test.c:10
>       40055c:       bf 2a 00 00 00          mov    -bashx2a,%edi
>       400561:       e8 d0 ff ff ff          callq  400536 <foo>
>     /home/ravi/test.c:11
> 
>   $ ./perf probe -x ./test 'foo i'
>   $ cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_events
>      p:probe_test/foo /home/ravi/test:0x0000000000000536 i=-12(%sp):s32
> 
>   $ ./perf record -e probe_test:foo ./test
>   $ ./perf script
>      test  5778 [001]  4918.562027: probe_test:foo: (400536) i=0
> 
> Here variable 'i' is passed via stack which is pushed on stack at
> 0x40053e. But we are probing at 0x400536.
> 
> To resolve this issues, we need to probe on next instruction after
> prologue. gdb and systemtap also does same thing. I've implemented
> this patch based on approach systemtap has used.
> 
> After applying patch:
> 
>   $ ./perf probe -x ./test 'foo i'
>   $ cat /sys/kernel/debug/tracing/uprobe_events
>     p:probe_test/foo /home/ravi/test:0x0000000000000541 i=-4(%bp):s32
> 
>   $ ./perf record -e probe_test:foo ./test
>   $ ./perf script
>     test  6300 [001]  5877.879327: probe_test:foo: (400541) i=42
> 
> No need to skip prologue for optimized case since debug info is correct
> for each instructions for -O2 -g. For more details please visit:
>         https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=612253#c6
> 
> Signed-off-by: Ravi Bangoria <ravi.bangoria@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>
> ---
> Changes in v2:
>   - Skipping prologue only when any ARG is either C variable, $params
>     or $vars.
>   - Probe on line(:1) may not be always possible. Recommend only address
>     to force probe on function entry.
> 
>  tools/perf/util/probe-finder.c | 164 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
>  1 file changed, 164 insertions(+)

This fixes the uprobe issue reported by Michael Petlan:
https://www.mail-archive.com/linux-perf-users@vger.kernel.org/msg02348.html

Acked-by: Naveen N. Rao <naveen.n.rao@...ux.vnet.ibm.com>